Caretakers

1638: 

If ‘vegan’ means more to us than a principle concerning the avoidance of animal-based foods, then it's just as much about how we think. If we start to see ourselves as caretakers rather than just 'takers', it will mean that our veganism is an ideal that extends beyond the kitchen and wardrobe, guiding us into a consistency-of-action - it examines harmlessness in all its aspects.

But vegans are alone with our ideals - we seem to be following a lost cause. Humans aren’t that altruistically inspired yet. It's still a 'me'-paradigm, where self-interest, reputation and acceptance from others is the common goal. We are much keener on helping humans than helping non-humans, especially those of the edible variety. The human is such a self-contradictory being. On the one hand we're kind, and thoughtful but on the other hand callous and thoughtless - so confusing for maintaining balance. Which is why vegan principles are so important - they're for keeping us thinking, challenging ourselves and acting consistently.

Vegans have largely separated away from any need for approval from those who are still living in the 'muddled zone'. And that's mainly because thinking and kindness is confined to our own species, or rather it's abandoned when certain non-humans come into the picture. Our human-centredness controls our thinking to the exclusion of almost everything outside the human sphere. So, animal activists have to be firmly on the side of the most vulnerable, because they are the ones who no one else thinks about, and they are the ones in such great numbers enslaved and abused by the enemy-human.

Such is the anthropocentric nature of human thinking that the question most humans want to ask of vegans is "What possible advantage could there be, fighting for the rights of non-humans?" And of course it's true - there are no rewards, no praise and no encouragement for our stand and therefore no notice taken of what we do for animals.

But if approval doesn’t matter much to us, then we might just become one of the planet’s natural caretakers, guarding the rights of those who at present have no rights. The farmer controls the life of the animals he owns (as if anyone can 'own' another living being!!). That's what we are up against, and why we seek to annul the farmer's right to ‘own’ animals.  I see our role as guardians of the vulnerable as being natural to us, because that's what we do best and that's what also brings us the greatest personal satisfaction.

If our brains are equipped with mirroring neurons for sympathising and empathising, it means we can guess at what others need; we are able to almost enter into another's being. We can imagine how they feel and then go on to attempt to help them. Whether ‘the other’ is a person, an animal or an ecosystem, we can use our empathy to make things work better, for others as well as ourselves. Whether it’s car maintenance or relating to another species or working in the field of human relationships, this is what humans are so good at. We are natural caretakers who can make things run smoothly, if only because we want to be useful to others. If we feel the empathy in us, it’s likely we’ll want to develop that skill for the sake of the ‘greater good’.